Chicago Sun-Times

ELECTRONIC VOTING UNDER SCRUTINY

Some states fighting for paper backups

- Voters wait to cast their ballots at St. Joesph’s Church in Spring Valley, N. Y., on Election Day. ElizabethW­eise @ eweise USA TODAY

Once about as SAN FRANCISCO newsworthy as water meters, the voting machines and computers used to record and tally the nation’s ballots are suddenly a hot- button issue because of mounting evidence Russia tried to interfere in the 2016 U. S. presidenti­al elections.

According to the FBI, as many as 39 states had their election systems scanned or targeted by Russia. There’s no evidence of votes changed.

But given the stakes, some state agencies that run elections are trying to curb any further interferen­ce before the midterm elections in November 2018.

Their tool of choice: Ensuring systems can’t be hacked, and if they are, making those breaches immediatel­y obvious. To do this, some are taking the unusual move of rewinding the technologi­cal dial, debating measures that would add paper

ballots — similar to how many Americans voted before electronic voting started to become widespread in the 1980s.

A week ago, Virginia announced it would no longer use touch- screen voting machines after a hack- a- thon in Las Vegas showed how easily they could be breached.

States with electronic- only voting machines want to add a paper- ballot backup that would require, for every electronic ballot cast, creation of a paper ballot that could be counted, and presumably, not easily altered.

Rhode Island is set to vote on a measure Tuesday that would require an audit of voters’ paper ballots after each election.

Georgia is fighting a suit by voters that , among other claims, alleges the state needs to switch to a paper- ballots- based voting system because it now uses touch- screen voting machines that do not meet the requiremen­ts of state law because of their age and vulnerabil­ity to hacking.

The U. S. voting machine industry is dominated by three privately- held companies, Election Systems & Software in Omaha, Dominion Voting Systems in Toronto and HartInterC­ivic in Austin. A wholesale refitting of the nation’s voting machine infrastruc­ture would represent a sizable sales opportunit­y for them. But there’s little money in the system to make that happen, experts say.

Too often, voting officials lack the resources necessary to protect and upgrade election infrastruc­tures, said Lawrence Norden of the Brennan Center for Justice at the New York University School of Law and author of a report in June called Securing Elections from Foreign Interferen­ce. “The federal government says it’s up to the states to fund it, the states often put it down to the counties, and the counties say they have no money. So we need some shared responsibi­lity for funding elections and making sure they’re free and fair,” he said.

Even so, some states are moving to overhaul their voting apparatus to be more secure. Last week, Virginia’s Board of Elections voted to replace touch- screen- only voting machines used in 22 localities in the state to those that have paper backups.

“The step we took today to decertify paperless voting systems is necessary to ensure the integrity of Virginia’s elections,” James Alcorn, chair of the State Board of Elections, said.

The state of Virginia has announced it will no longer use touch- screen voting machines after a hack- athon in Las Vegas showed how easily the machines could be breached.

 ?? JOHN MEORE, THE JOURNAL NEWS ??
JOHN MEORE, THE JOURNAL NEWS

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States